10. Does your company currently produce and/or sell any of the training calibers listed above? If yes, provide a list of your Government customers to include agency name and a point of contact with phone number or email address. 11. Describe your production facilities and capabilities. 12. Describe your quality assurance program. 13. What is your experience in working with your customers to identify and correct potential quality issues? 14. Are you capable of producing any of the training calibers listed above to meet the stated performance requirements? 15. Are you capable of producing large quantity orders of any training caliber specified with a short turnaround time of 30-60 days? 16. What would your lead time be for an order of 2 million rounds of a single type listed above? 17. If you were awarded a contract for some of the calibers listed above, submitted a production lot of one million rounds and that lot or portion of the lot was not accepted, would you be able to replace that order with an additional one million rounds within 60 days? 18. Do you have the resources and mechanisms required to endure the recalling or rejection of production lots of ammunition: What is your plan for mitigating this risk? 19. Provide information to include material safety data sheets and retail price lists for all caliber types and components of training ammunition. 20. Where would production take place?

and my take, very dangerous to be in on this game. It should be clear to all that government has found an end run around the people, and it is going to take clear advantage for as long as the people are going to allow it. I don’t see much leadership, from the industry. That would be from shooters manufacturers, proponents like NRA or ammo folks. Some say, and that would be from a local ammo manufacturer that the reason for shortages now, are that a major portion of the public has become a buyer now instead of just previous gun owners. Don’t know how true but price and availability or lack of, is sure an issue.

More likely it’s what’s called a Request For Information (RFI). They always specify that the request is not an RFQ nor any obligations by the government to issue an order are given.

This is typically supposed to be a one-shot deal to help the government develop their requirements (realistically) in HONEST intention of procuring what they basically want.

However, I’ve dealt with unethical government organizations that think they can jerk vendors around like puppets, often issuing 3,4,5 of these things as they finally get their act together. You can usually spot it when the person or persons don’t know what they are doing by the types of information they want and the level of detail they are looking for.

On this one? It seems that they are asking a lot about the ability to produce, recover, etc.- questions you’d be asking when your requirement is urgent from an operational perspective, e.g., battlefield supply, etc. This seems a wee bit nosy for “training” needs if you ask me.

The government OWNs about 14 Ammunition Plants that are contractor operated. One wonders if the DHS even knows about this or has coordinated with the Army (that runs the contracts operating them). Left hand, meet right hand. They are looking outside that supply line and asking a whole lot of questions with no promises after answering.

As late as 2000+ the Army had been looking at small arms ammunition procurement and had an investigation/study done. In that investigation there were a total of 14 still-active plants. True some, maybe a lot of them were deactivated, but there is not JUST ONE plant. Take a look at McAlester Ammunition Plant, for example. I’m not going to search back through the rest of the list to make a point. McAlester was enough for me.

Anyone selling to the DHS is selling to the enemy. After the number of rounds ordered/ purchased is known, Congress needs to force the SA, err, the DHS to sell it back to the American public.
Big Sis is Ernst Rohm transgendered.

" Interestingly, that good stuff as you put it cannot be used in a military conflict covered by the Geneva Convention, being that it is *all* hollow point."

Your posts have no validity or value because of the erroneous information presented. The Geneva Conventions deal with the treatment of war prisoners and do not address the subject at hand. It is The Hague Conventions that address acceptable methods and bullet types used when conducting civilized warfare between nations. Those conventions only apply to uniformed enemy soldiers, not against terrorists or during civil wars. In addition, the U.S. did not sign the Hague Conventions, although we generally conform to the Standards.

" US ammo makers have chosen their side."

Which side of what? The U.S. commercial ammunition manufacturers are running at maximum capacity and have never produced more ammunition than recently. The U.S. government buys only a tiny fraction of that production. The majority is being purchased and hoarded by civilian conspiracy freaks who believe the nonsense published on various Internet forums by genuine, low information, kooks.

This is frangible bulleted ammunition intended to be fired against hardened steel backstops and/or targets at close range during training. It is designed to reduce ricochets and bullet particle spash back that might injure the students or trainers.

Which side of what? The U.S. commercial ammunition manufacturers are running at maximum capacity and have never produced more ammunition than recently. The U.S. government buys only a tiny fraction of that production. The majority is being purchased and hoarded by civilian conspiracy freaks who believe the nonsense published on various Internet forums by genuine, low information, kooks.

“Hollow point ammunition is not banned by the Geneva Convention. This is often incorrectly believed. The Hague Convention of 1899, Declaration III, prohibits the use in international warfare of bullets which easily expand or flatten in the body. The crucial point is “warfare”. They are legal for hunting and in some situations (inside an aircraft as an example, self defence and law enforcement) where it is preferential to contain the round.”

Some hollow point ammo that the Military uses is not designed for expansion but for stability of flight in long range use.

However it and identical LE ammunition can be and is used by local, state, federal law enforcement. If a citizen or alien is fired upon by LE within US borders, the ammunition is always or nearly always Jacketed hollow points.

Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.